..if we want anyone to show up to our protests.

Our party has a severe disadvantage to the Dems in arranging protests among our mainstream constituency--the overwhelming majority of us have jobs (which is probably the main reason why we oppose healthcare reform).

Thus, to get anyone to show up, we have to engage in a bit of demagoguery to attract the unemployable but delightfully paranoid among us. Are the Hitler comparisons distasteful? Sure they are. They're not even remotely apt. They're self-produced by a some of our more aggressive minions.

But these people won't respond to arguments about, say, the dilution of our currency through the issuance of debt. They won't respond to historical examples of great powers who squandered their treasury through morally satisfying but low return investments. Hell, social Darwinism doesn't even work anymore.

So please, pardon our indulgence. We had to put up with eight years of hippies.

A well reasoned observation, but unfortunately it is the fringe of any group which attracts the media attention. While the fringe of any group does not necessarly represent the ideals and goals of the group on the whole, it can, and often does, give the group a bad public image simply because of the often negative media attention it attracts.

You alleded to hippies, though I've never been exactly sure of what a hippie was supposed to be. During the peace movement in the Sixties and early Seventies, the peace movement was a very very broad and diverse group, encompassing nearly all alsects of society, yet is was the demonstators who attracted most of the media attention.

And even with the demonstrators, there was a good deal of diversity within their ranks.

As for so-called tea bagges, it would seem that their only igoal to oppose anything Obama proposes.

Which would at the very least hinder their own objectivity in regards to the present administration.

I think it's fair the use an all-encompassing and mildy insulting term like "hippies" if the opposition is going to use an all-encompassing and mildly insulting term like "teabaggers"

(btw, I can't emphasize enough how much I enjoy the term "teabaggers". Especially, as a fan of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia. poor Rickety Cricket)

Morally satisfying but low return investments?

Are you referring to green cars or space lasers that can circumsize a knat from outer space?

Average blue state income: $45,752 Average red state income: $38,333

Ahem. I have a job. I also have healthcare that eats about 1/2 of what I make pre-tax (and I make a little more than the median income in my state).

"the overwhelming majority of us have jobs"

. . . except for your Congressmen (Bachmann, Boehner, Cantor), who apparently have nothing better to do than stand on the street and scream lies and nonsense. When are they going to get off the government dole?

You have hit upon the quintessential welfare group in American society,

Politicians.

The plauge of any society.

Short of an all-out rebellion, I don't know what could be done here. And the cure is liable to be worse than the disease is.

I am referring to "green" cars*, wind turbines, healthcare for the uninsured, medicare--all programs that make you feel good but provide zero meaningful economic return to capex spent.

"Space lasers", in addition to being cool as all Hell, are really more of an insurance policy against a national extinction level event--and thus would be expected to provide a negative return.

Bella, that's a pretty shitty policy you're signed up for...

*The Toyota Prius engine costs about $5,000 more to manufacture than a normal Toyota engine. Much more than the PV of the gas savings and not much less carbon-intensive. See Harvard Business School Case No. 9-706-458

Bento, please continue, and explain trade offs of green cars/tech, the pros and cons of R&D, and the mindset that thinks green technology is ready to carry the torch that carbon fuels do currently, and do so profitibably, practically, and without any sacrifice or added cost to the consumer.

But you're not learning from the Democrats' mistake... The Dems were LOSING because of the hippies. They let their fringe speak for the party for 5 years, and it failed miserably. And now the GOP thinks it will win with the same losing strategy the Dems tried for half a decade. They're going to give Obama the White House and a Blue congress until 2014.

Bentoniani:

..if we want anyone to show up to our protests.

Our party has a severe disadvantage to the Dems in arranging protests among our mainstream constituency--the overwhelming majority of us have jobs (which is probably the main reason why we oppose healthcare reform).

Wow, the entire debate distilled down into one easy to swallow line of crap. How easy it must be to live in your world.

Bentoniani:

..if we want anyone to show up to our protests.

Our party has a severe disadvantage to the Dems in arranging protests among our mainstream constituency--the overwhelming majority of us have jobs (which is probably the main reason why we oppose healthcare reform).

Wow, the entire debate distilled down into one easy to swallow line of crap. How easy it must be to live in your world.

Whoops, mind the double post.

Yes, it is a shitty policy, unfortunately, it is the only one offered by my husband's employer and my employer does not offer coverage, since it is just the boss (who qualifies for medicare) and I. Yes, I've investigated buying our insurance through the private market, and the choices are even worse. By the time we get done with premiums for our daughter and I, shell out copays (that have quadrupled since 2001), and pay to park at the pediatrician's - you're talking about real money.